Sure, men and women's brains are wired differently, but which difference would change this situation?

Because women understand from a young age that men covet their bodies and as such uses their clothing as a shield.

This is why rape exists after all.

Stripping a woman by force for all to see mentally injuries them more so than a boy or a man. It is mental rape to a woman.

Did you know in jewish prisons in Israel they strip Palestinian women naked as punishment?

Stripping women naked has been used as a tool of oppression against all of women since the dawn of mankind.

While embarrassing and even humiliating for a man or boy it doesn't come close to mental rape as it does with a woman, because a woman subconsciously knows men are eying them and having naughty thoughts about them and that being naked for all to see puts them half a step closer to physical rape.

Because women understand from a young age that men covet their bodies and as such uses their clothing as a shield.

This is why rape exists after all.

Stripping a woman by force for all to see mentally injuries them more so than a boy or a man. It is mental rape to a woman.

Did you know in jewish prisons in Israel they strip Palestinian women naked as punishment?

Stripping women naked has been used as a tool of oppression against all of women since the dawn of mankind.

While embarrassing and even humiliating for a man or boy it doesn't come close to mental rape as it does with a woman, because a woman subconsciously knows men are eying them and having naughty thoughts about them.

To deny that difference is foolish and ignorant at best.

Oh boo hoo hoo. In a few years these little hussies will probably be taking it all off at some drunken party anyway, they arent being oppressed, and they arent innocent babes snatched off the streets.
If they can dish it out, they can take it.

Oh boo hoo hoo. In a few years these little hussies will probably be taking it all off at some drunken party anyway, they arent being oppressed, and they arent innocent babes snatched off the streets.
If they can dish it out, they can take it.

Why stop with stripping them naked for the 11 year old to see Fulminata? They posted the boy naked online, why not do that to them too?

That's fair in your eyes after all.

That's what you are using as an argument to validate your point? Boo, hoo, hoo and assumption?

Honestly I understand. You couldn't find any flaw in my logic so the next best thing is to type up drivel and assumption in some convoluted attempt to justify your zeal even if it comes no where near close to the same "crime" on multiple accounts.

What part of the video even remotely implies or states the girls did this in an attempt to give sexual gratification to perverts or themselves?

I think it's safe to assume they wanted to see the boy naked. That alone is a sexual motive.

Look I was a teenager once I remembered what it was like to have sex on the brain all of the time. The girls not as much but they weren't far behind. This is normal as those are the prime childbearing years. It's just in last few decades we have gotten rid of social taboos.

The video wasn't some artsy portrayal of the human body. It's purpose was degradation and humiliation to this kid, hence the title "owned".

Let me explain it another way. Let's assume the exact same assault takes place, but instead it was two 30-year-old women doing that to the boy. Would you still think that they deserve only a slap on the wrist?

My point is the crime is the same but amount of culpability is different because of the ages. I think an appropriate punishment for the girls would be half a year in juvi, no lasting record or anything like that. This would make a statement that:

A. Male children have protection under the law, and

B. Just because an offender happens to be female it doesn't give the free license to do whatever.

What you say here about women is true. But it's still not the full picture! (I told you that this issue could get involved in various debatable and controversial aspects!)

Yes you did, I've researched into the topic of nudity and did some heavy thinking on what justifies as child pornography, as well as reading on these aspects myself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nordic2005

Rape is, according to some thinkers, not primarily a sexual crime -- though sex certainly is the means of the crime -- as it is a horrifying act of vicious violence against the personal dignity and honor of the victim.

Still those that generally dabble in that type of sadistic pleasure are doing it for the pleasure of it to begin with. Need it be to dishonor, or for pure sexual gratification, they get off to both just the same. Did you know some rapist have only be able to achieve an orgasm through rape? It's the torture and oppression of a woman in it's most base form that gets them off. Ted Bundy is the most famous example of such a person.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nordic2005

As to the question of nudity? Here's where the family aspect come into the foreground.

Let me illustrate from two experiences I witnessed:

1. Years ago, I was riding my bicycle in the wealthy part of town, where the houses were large and luxurious and the front lawns very green and spacious. I saw a young boy, probably about four years old, playing in the lawn sprinkler in his underwear (I think he was too young to be wearing swimming trunks), with his mother and father right out there with him. This little baby of a child spontaneously undressed himself because he wanted to get his entire body wet. The reaction of his parents? They thought this was hysterically funny and played right along with the child, never scolding him or shaming him. They just laughed good-naturedly about it. I just continued to ride by without giving this any particular thought. This all took no more than 20 seconds of my time. (I never even saw the child's genitals, this all happened so quickly, but he was obviously naked, facing away from me and towards his parents.)

2. Years ago, I likewise noticed, as I came out from my garage on the way back into my house, as two preschool girls (again about four to five years old) next-door spontaneously removed their clothing in their own backyard. The girls' mother's reaction? Hysteria! She totally freaked out. She raised her voice in violent protest and swiftly escorted theses tots into the house and made sure they got their clothes back on right away. She taught them never to even think of doing this again. This event took probably about 15 seconds of my time (at best), as I certainly did not think it was any of my business.

The point? The family is the primary source of attitude about nudity in very young children as they are growing up. As they become older, the culture begins to shape their attitudes on this and many other issues of life.

There are differences of opinion as to whether, and if so to what extent, parents should appear naked in front of their children. Gordon and Schroeder report that parental nudity varies considerably from family to family. They say that "there is nothing inherently wrong with bathing with children or otherwise appearing naked in front of them", noting that doing so may provide an opportunity for parents to provide important information. They note that by ages five to six, children begin to develop a sense of modesty, and recommend to parents who wish to be sensitive to their children's wishes that they limit such activities from that age onwards.

Bonner recommends against nudity in the home if children exhibit sexual play of a type that is considered problematic.

A U.S. study by Alfred Kinsey found that 75% of the participants stated that there was never nudity in the home when they were growing up, 5% of the participants said that there was "seldom" nudity in the home, 3% said "often", and 17% said that it was "usual". The study found that there was no significant difference between what was reported by men and by women with respect to frequency of nudity in the home.

In a 1995 review of the literature, Paul Okami concluded that there was no reliable evidence linking exposure to parental nudity to any negative effect. Three years later, his team finished an 18-year longitudinal study that showed that, if anything, such exposure was associated with slight beneficial effects, particularly for boys.

That should help you address some of the questions you have over the idea of nudity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nordic2005

We all know that in modern Europe, attitudes towards nudity are less Puritanical than in the States, generally. There are plenty of beaches and resorts in Europe where entire families practice nude sunbathing. Do the women who practice this really feel that they are being mentally raped? I don't have the answers to these questions. I am not a "nudist" and never have been. But the nudists tell us that they are proud of their bodies. Again, how is right and wrong on this controversial subject to be determined?

I would say European women don't mind because they've been so open about nudity for such a long time. A certain social setting for nudity is allowed there. Still you will hardly find people doing business in the nude. Most people that regularly practice it are comfortable with their bodies and prying eyes. Still that said their culture embraces nudity. While for us on public beaches men would be ogling their eyes out, there it's not so common because they've seen it for so long.

When we see the human form nude and in a tasteful way, when it's been shaped to physical perfection it's something to be admired.

Personally I'm against that type of open nudity in a serious public setting because it makes two consensual adults showing off nudity between themselves all that much more sensual for each other.

Never mind the glaring fact that more of our nations are being overran by non-whites and I'd certainly not care for them ogling at my wife, children, mother or sister.

And I certainly wouldn't be comfortable seeing my mother or sister naked either!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nordic2005

This is all I will say, as I've wandered much too far from the core topic of this thread.

I disagree, it has merit at large for the social proclivities involved for all of us when concerning nudity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nordic2005

I will leave you with this question to ponder:

To what extent do we want the State to spy on our home life to make very sure that we citizens, in our private, everyday family affairs, are following the State's demands on our behaviors? The State may be Puritanical, or it may be ultra liberal; but should it tell us what we can and cannot do, when to be able to enforce this requires the abolition of all our privacy in the home? Should citizens be forced to live in glass houses, to ensure that the State -- the government -- can always monitor our every activity, so that we can never have the least opportunity to step out of line -- whatever the Party Line may happen to be?

With personal freedom, there will always be some risk that some people will misbehave and abuse that freedom. This is the price that we must pay if we are to have any freedom at all.

Because women understand from a young age that men covet their bodies and as such uses their clothing as a shield.

This is why rape exists after all.

Stripping a woman by force for all to see mentally injuries them more so than a boy or a man. It is mental rape to a woman.

Did you know in jewish prisons in Israel they strip Palestinian women naked as punishment?

Stripping women naked has been used as a tool of oppression against them since the dawn of mankind.

While embarrassing and even humiliating for a man or boy it doesn't come close to mental rape as it does with a woman, because a woman subconsciously knows men are eying them and having naughty thoughts about them.

To deny that difference is foolish and ignorant at best.

What you say here about women is true. But it's still not the full picture! (I told you that this issue could get involved in various debatable and controversial aspects!)

Rape is, according to some thinkers, not primarily a sexual crime -- though sex certainly is the means of the crime -- as it is a horrifying act of vicious violence against the personal dignity and honor of the victim.

As to the question of nudity? Here's where the family aspect come into the foreground.

Let me illustrate from two experiences I witnessed:

1. Years ago, I was riding my bicycle in the wealthy part of town, where the houses were large and luxurious and the front lawns very green and spacious. I saw a young boy, probably about four years old, playing in the lawn sprinkler in his underwear (I think he was too young to be wearing swimming trunks), with his mother and father right out there with him. This little baby of a child spontaneously undressed himself because he wanted to get his entire body wet. The reaction of his parents? They thought this was hysterically funny and played right along with the child, never scolding him or shaming him. They just laughed good-naturedly about it. I just continued to ride by without giving this any particular thought. This all took no more than 20 seconds of my time. (I never even saw the child's genitals, this all happened so quickly, but he was obviously naked, facing away from me and towards his parents.)

2. Years ago, I likewise noticed, as I came out from my garage on the way back into my house, that two preschool girls (again about four to five years old) next-door had spontaneously removed their clothing in their own backyard. The girls' mother's reaction? Hysteria! She totally freaked out. She raised her voice in violent protest and swiftly escorted theses tots into the house and made sure they got their clothes back on right away. She taught them never to even think of doing this again. This event took probably about 15 seconds of my time (at best), as I certainly did not think it was any of my business.

The point? The family is the primary source of attitudes about nudity in very young children as they are growing up. As they become older, the culture begins to shape their attitudes on this and many other issues of life.

We all know that in modern Europe, attitudes towards nudity are less Puritanical than in the States, generally. There are plenty of beaches and resorts in Europe where entire families practice nude sunbathing. Do the women who practice this really feel that they are being mentally raped? I don't have the answers to these questions. I am not a "nudist" and never have been. But the nudists tell us that they are proud of their bodies. Again, how is right and wrong on this controversial subject to be determined?

This is all I will say, as I've wandered much too far from the core topic of this thread.

I will leave you with this question to ponder:

To what extent do we want the State to spy on our home life to make very sure that we citizens, in our private, everyday family affairs, are following the State's demands on our behaviors? The State may be Puritanical, or it may be ultra liberal; but should it tell us what we can and cannot do, when to be able to enforce this requires the abolition of all our privacy in the home? Should citizens be forced to live in glass houses, to ensure that the State -- the government -- can always monitor our every activity, so that we can never have the least opportunity to step out of line -- whatever the Party Line may happen to be?

With personal freedom, there will always be some risk that some people will misbehave and abuse that freedom. This is the price that we must pay if we are to have any freedom at all.

Remember, when there is a strong public moral consensus on some question, nearly all citizens will live by that consensus to the best of their abilities.